On road costs

Page 1 / 2
legacy_girlz, Oct 26, 10:24pm
What does everyone think of a dealer charging $450 for 'on road' costs on a second hand vehicle? Yes it has to have the standard rego & WOF but this is always included in the ticket price and supposedly the rest is for a groom. Given the fact that the car is 11 years old (albeit with low mileage) they would not have paid a lot for it as a trade in (I'm thinking about half the ticket price), surely the extra $450 is a rip off?
martin11, Oct 26, 10:37pm
Why does it have on road costs it is already Reg and Warrented ?
toyboy3, Oct 26, 10:44pm
By having on road costs ,it allows the dealer to list the car with a cheaper list price , therefore it is a carrot offering to entice you in the door
kazbanz, Oct 26, 10:47pm
Do you want the car? IS it a trade in or in fact a fresh import.
Either way If you want the car then make an offer to buy.
Ignore ORC etc and say "That's the total amount I'm prepared to pay"
Don't buy into smoke and mirrors selling
legacy_girlz, Oct 26, 10:56pm
The car has been here since new (2004) so is already warranted & registered and due to the low kms, is very clean & tidy anyway and would have been a trade in. Daughter bought a 2010 model early this year and all was included in the ticket price, as has been the case in every other car we have bought from dealers in the past. A bit cheeky I thought. I might just go & see what they have to say anyway.
tgray, Oct 27, 1:56am
Is it a mistake on the listing?
If not, perhaps it has been deregistered due to an accident or a stolen and recovered vehicle that requires re registering.
Let us know what they tell you.
westwyn, Oct 27, 8:29am
Whether you personally like it or hate it, it is a valid and legal process when selling a vehicle yet to be registered, AS LONG AS the costs are stated (a) within the advertising material, and (b) the CIN notice states the TOTAL amount payable by a consumer at point of sale on the road- plus to a lesser extent (c) the charge may not reek of usury- a dealer cannot charge say $795 on-road costs for a 6-month registration on a fresh import, since they cannot justify an extra $400 for organising plates. This isn't to be confused with the costs to comply a car- the process a vehicle must go through to enable an MR2A (the right to register form) to be issued. That cost is normally borne by the importer.

Some dealers list this way, some don't. And while some use it as a means to show a lower advertised price (which is legal to do so, as long as it states "plus on-road costs / charges) and generate extra profit, some genuinely run on $200-a car margins, and the MR2A cost is simply paid by the buyer on top.

Just as some list with MR2A costs included, but absorb it into the pricing in a way where you can't tell where.

Each to their own. If it's a good deal, and you've factored in the extra on-road costs in your comparisons, it's a good deal no matter how it's presented.
stevo2, Oct 27, 8:36am
My daughter just replaced her car and the ORC was $300. They put the cost in their advert on here.
Some sellars just advertise + ORC. An email to one chain of cars that are 2cheap and you find that their ORC is $500 and their cars are the untidiest you have ever seen.
If you absolutely must exclude ORC's, at least have the balls to say how much extra they will cost!
casper35, Oct 27, 8:45am
Still shouldn't be any ORC with a car that has been in the country for that long.
westwyn, Oct 27, 8:55am
As tgray said above, it's either an error (the dealership normaly deals with fresh imports, and this car has already been in NZ- the dealers' listing templates simply assume everything is "plus on-road costs" and the person loading hasn't noticed. OR- it's a car that has been re-registered (either the previous rego lapsed, OR it was a write-off that has been rebuilt and recertified).

Hopefully the OP will come back and tell us which one it was.
legacy_girlz, Oct 27, 9:48am
No it's not a mistake in the listing because I emailed them to ask what the $450 was for. It has not been de-registered at any stage (did a paid CarJam report). 3 owners in NZ including the dealer & only has brand new plates because previous owner has a personalised plate on it. It is currently registered till June 2016 & has a current WOF till May 2016 (1 year WOF).
franc123, Oct 27, 9:54am
I sure as hell wouldn't be paying ANY additional on road cost component if it was plated and licensed and warranted! They will obviously have to upgrade the WOF since its 5 months old but that is their cost not yours.
sw20, Oct 27, 9:59am
Sounds like a car yard in Christchurch that used to only sell manual cars. There was a NZ New car on the lot there, clearly a trade in. Had + ORC on the CIN card. I queried why it had +ORC since it was already registered and had been on the road since 1995. I got a defensive reply about how a WOF and a groomers time aren't free. then tried to sell me a Uniden alarm (that retailed with installation on Trade Me for $299) for $550 installed "that we aren't making a cent on!"
legacy_girlz, Oct 27, 10:01am
My thoughts exactly. Will go & have a look & see what they say and being female they will try to take advantage & spin the BS no doubt but they might find they are picking on the wrong lady! :)
tgray, Oct 27, 6:41pm
Replacing a personalised plate has nothing to do with on road costs!
I still have no idea what the $450 charge is for and I would call them up and challenge them on this.
kazbanz, Oct 27, 7:12pm
And by the buyer being focussed on "not paying ORC" they are playing the smoke and mirrors game.
I genuinely feel that it may not be against the law to add ORC to the price of a car it is definitely unethical. On the basis that the plus orc is ALWAYS fine print.
tgray, Oct 27, 7:30pm
You wouldn't be paying any ORC's because there isn't any in this instance.
The extra $450 appears to be an 'extra charge,' whilst playing on the ignorance of the general public in thinking a shiny new plate being put on, costs $450.
Remember in this instance, the car is already registered and is simply having a change of plate from a personalised one previously.
3tomany, Oct 27, 8:56pm
yip kaz is correct
westwyn, Oct 28, 8:05am
You emailed them about it? What was their reply?
franc123, Oct 28, 8:35am
Go for it! I'm sure everyone who has posted on this thread is VERY keen on what justifies these non existent ORC's, even if they decided to charge for a basic oil and filter service, a full tank of fuel, some chocolates in the glove box and a bouquet of flowers in the boot I'm still not seeing $450. I admire your persistence.
legacy_girlz, Oct 28, 9:39am
They just said that the $450 was for 6 months rego (which the previous owner has already paid for by the way), a WOF (which they are required by law to supply anyway, a service (it's only done 64,000km so wouldn't need a lot) and a groom. Every other vehicle I have bought from a dealer has all these things included in the ticket price (let's face it, they are making enough on trade-ins to cover it anyway). I have emailed them again asking them to explain so will be interesting to see what they come back with but intend to pay them a visit anyway.
legacy_girlz, Oct 28, 9:42am
Thank you. It will be an interesting exercise anyway and I will let you know how I go for sure.
legacy_girlz, Oct 28, 9:45am
The personalised plate was changed in 2010 when the first owner sold it so this was never a cost to the dealer anyway as they traded it from owner #2.
westwyn, Oct 28, 10:16am
Put it simply- based upon the reply they gave you- they are legally unable to charge you "on road costs" in this instance, and are in breach of the Fair Trading Act if they do, or attempt to do so. The vehicle is already plated and registered- you cannot be charged for something the car already comes with. You're correct on the WOF too- the dealer cannot charge you for a WOF since it is a legal requirement for sale (issued within 28 days).

The only items they COULD charge you for are the groom and a service, but ONLY if these are offered to you as 'extras' which you have the option of choosing to have performed AFTER viewing the vehicle, NOT if they've already been done when you looked at the car. And- a big AND- they cannot call this an "on road cost".

There's no legal requirement for a car to be sold groomed and / or serviced- if it's cheap enough and it's the dealer's model to present cars in that condition, with you opting for whatever "extras" you want on top of the price, that's up to you to decide whether to pay for or not. But you cannot be made to pay for something that has already been done before you bought it (if this is the case).

1:
Go in and find out how this works out.
2.
Report back here what happens.
3.
No matter what, do not buy a car from this outfit if your assumptions turn out to be correct. This will not turn out well.
westwyn, Oct 28, 10:19am
Oh- and 4- if it is indeed as above, take careful notes (even a sly cellphone audio recording) and report them immediately to the Commerce Commission. Nail their a*s to the wall. Stuff like this drags our industry down.